Jesus is fictional
Offline It's a hot topic on this forum lately so I thought you guys would be interested in a live podcast this Sunday starting at 3 PM Eastern time zone. Two former believers now atheists [and members here] do a show called Strang frequaincies radio. Host Bobby and Jason have scheduald a live phone linked interview with both Dr.Richard Carrier & Dr. Robert Price on the topic of is Jesus fictional?. http://www.para-help.com/sfr/ The chat room they run is pretty lively, and the hosts watch it; meaning If you have a viable question for the guests it will be relayed to them and credited to you. Hope to see you all there.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
- Login to post comments
bump.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Just listened to their Krauss interview and look forward to listening to Carrier and Price when they put the mp3 links up.
robert price has lately become one of my favorite rogue theologians. his sheer erudition is enough to put off most believers.
me, i'm more of a fan of his for editing the call of cthulhu fiction series from chaosium.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
This sounds cool. So how did it go?
Have you guys seen the Carrier presentation on Skepticon.org? He did it in Springfied, MO which is almost part of the bible belt!
But he laid out a GREAT case for the Jesus myth than NO ONE could refute! Really good stuff! Someone should post the video here!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
I loved it.You can hear the entire show by going to my original link http://www.para-help.com/sfr/ and when you get to the main page click on "downloads", it's worth a relisten anytime.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Finally got around to listening to Carrier and Price. Both are very articulate and thought provoking.
The final thing that tipped Price into mythicism was how the NT is clearly derived from the OT.
I was fairly familiar with what Carrier thought already, but Price brought up a few things I'd not heard before, so I'll need to do more investigation.
These were:
There were no synagogues in 1st century Galilee.
The Paul character could be based on Simon Magus.
The meaning of the word Barrabas is 'son of the father' and in one document he was called Jesus Barrabas.
In fact, the meanings of the names of many of the characters in the stories are interesting, making it likely that they were symbolic characters.
Another point that has struck me before is: to be consistent, one must also question the historicity of all characters who have no strong evidence for them.
I gather that Mohammad falls into this category, but for the moment, I'd better stick with looking into Christianity. I'm still part way through looking into the source of Exodus and Genesis, but got bogged down as there is so much tangential reading to do. It all gets a bit exponential.
Life is shortish, so time management is helpful.
I'm sure it's interesting but can anyone post a transcript or partial transcript if we're not able to listen to it all?
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
So I downloaded it and have played a half an hour so far but these 2 hosts are just talking mumbo jumbo and haven't even got to Price and Carrier yet! What's going on??
They mentioned them in the beginning but now are just talking gibberish! You got a direct link when Price and Carrier actually start talking?
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
It's episode 197. They seperate the three hour show into 3 segments ; you were listening to the free talk [hour one mp3] read the links for hour two mp3{richard Carrier] or hour three mp3 {robert Price.] Good luck.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Oh, I thought I only saw one link. I'll have to listen to it some other time.
In the meantime if anyone can even post a partial transcript that would be great!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
I'll get back to this in a second, but yes. That's what it means. Bar Abbas.
If you understand the meanings of some of the names, and follow the subtext, it makes a lot more sense. Jesus had two Zealots (anti-Roman revolutionaries) and a hired assassin. Who? Judas Iscariot -- a "Sicarii". Anyone reading the Gospels at the time would have known exactly what that meant, as well as what having two Zealots..
My approach is to look at their name, their origins (Galilee was a hot-bed of anti-Roman activity), and whatever else is around them, time-wise.
The best evidence is that Jesus (if he existed at all) was more on the "defeat the Romans by being better Jews" side of things, but still willing to be a charismatic leader of a political movement.
I ran across someone who claim that Muhammad fabricated Islam by deciding, theological point by theological point, which aspects of Christianity and Judaism were "best" and choosing the better of the two.
Even at the time of Muhammad there were Christians who rejected the death and miraculous resurrection of Jesus, as well as his divinity. That's what we see -- Jesus is just another prophet, with an explicit denial that he was ever crucified. Which makes me wonder if there wasn't a tradition that the "Jesus Barabbas" who was let go by Pilate wasn't actually Jesus.
If he'd been slapped around, whipped, and let go, there'd be no record of any of that in contemporary Roman literature. If he was such a huge threat as to have warranted days-long trials, etc., then a miraculous resurrection after being executed, we'd know about it. Based on that, I'm going with the former. When his brother James was murdered around 55CE, I'm guessing that James' death was attributed to the founder of the sect. The "Jesus will rebuild the Temple" language found in the Gospels puts their writing well after 70CE.
"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."
But there is NO record of Jesus in contemporary Roman literature. Not even a single eyewitness account despite preposterous bible claims that he had THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS and followers and performed all sorts of miracles! No contemporary record of his existence despite having very good historical records from that era!
The dude was mythical and the very fact that he NEVER returns (eventhough he PROMISED) is further validation of this every day!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
I realise that it doesn't take a lot of effort to use Google, but since I have done, I may as well put this information in one place.
Jesus Barabbas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barabbas#Other_interpretations
Benjamin Urrutia, co-author of The Logia of Yeshua: The Sayings of Jesus, agrees with Maccoby and others who say that Yeshua Bar Abba or Jesus Barabbas must be none other than Jesus of Nazareth, and that the choice between two prisoners is a fiction.
This practice of releasing a prisoner is said by Magee and others to be an element in a literary creation of Mark, who needed to have a contrast to the true "son of the father" in order to set up an edifying contest, in a form of parable.
Dennis R. MacDonald, in The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, notes that a similar episode to the one that occurs in Mark—of a crowd picking one figure over another figure similar to the other—occurred in The Odyssey, where Odysseus entered the palace disguised as a beggar and defeated his wife's suitors to reclaim his throne.[18] MacDonald suggests Mark borrowed from this section of The Odyssey and used it to pen the Barabbas tale, only this time Jesus- the protagonist- loses to highlight the cruelty of Jesus' persecutors.[18] However, this theory too is rejected by other scholars.[19]
For completeness, here is the gospel reference to Jesus Barabbas.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2027:15-26;&version=TNIV; and
http://www.ovc.edu/tc/lay03mat.htm
Matthew 27:16-17:
TEXT: "a notorious prisoner, called Jesus Barabbas. . . . release to plyou, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called Christ?"
EVIDENCE: Theta f1 700* syr(s,pal)
TRANSLATIONS: RSVn NEB TEV
RANK: C
NOTES: "a notorious prisoner, called Barabbas. . . . release to plyou, Barabbas or Jesus who is called Christ?"
EVIDENCE: S A B D K L W Delta Pi 064 f13 33 565 700c 892 1010 1241 Byz Lect lat vg syr(p,h) few syr(pal) cop
TRANSLATIONS: KJV ASV RSV NASV NIV NEBn
COMMENTS: The name "Jesus" before "Barabbas" in verses 16 and 17 is in brackets in the UBS text. Although the name "Jesus Barabbas" is found in only a few manuscripts, it is more likely to be original, because copyists would have been likely to have omitted the name "Jesus" from before "Barabbas" out of reverence, and there is no reason for it to have been added.
Judas Iscariot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judas_iscariot#Etymology
The significance of "Iscariot" is uncertain. There are several major theories on etymology:
I'm not qualified to choose between these, but the objection that the sicarii arose in the 40s or 50s isn't much of an objection, considering that the gospels were written a long time after this and that stories introduce references that the readers can relate to.
Here is Price on how the Judas story is silly if taken literally. He goes with option 3:
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/art_judas_say.htm
Why do the enemies of Jesus need Judas? He guides them to the Garden, but anyone could have shadowed a prominent group like Jesus’ entourage. He tells the arresting party that he will point out the man they want. But they are there to seize him on account of his dangerous popularity! How could they not know which one he was? “Hey, which of you guys is Elvis?” Judas has been clumsily shoe-horned into the story. Why does he betray? Because he is the betrayer. How does he betray? By being on the scene.
They are often given punning names to signal their sheer utility. In this case, the betrayer is “Judas,” a Jew, or rather, the Jew. And he is named Iscariot, or “Man of Falsehood.”
And to illustrate just what a catchy story the Judas one is:
I've also read somewhere that the Quran was constructed that way.
The destruction of the second temple is good for dating.
I need to look further into James. There are debates about whether 'the brother of the Lord' is intended blood-literally or matey-fraternally.
The entire "virgin birth" thing was invented decades after Jesus's supposed life and death.
And trust me on this one -- Jews don't run around referring to other Jews as "brother" all the time unless they really are brothers.
"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."
I understand the word "virgin" simply ment 'young girl'; has in -- the time between first menses and marriage -- before her first period she is a child, after marriage she is a wife/adult. "virgin" in fact had nothing to do with sexual activity and 'born to a virgin' meant 'born to a single mother'. Based on that scenario -- Who qualify's as a Jew is determined by weather or not your mother is Jewish reguardless of marriage or who the biological father is.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
If an unmarried Jewish woman and a Jewish man have sex, the only way they are not suddenly married is if they cannot marry. By Jewish law, the only way they cannot suddenly be married is if she is already married to someone else, or if she is forbidden to him by consanguinity or other laws.
The notion that Mary and Joseph were not married under the Laws of Moses (which are actually the Laws of G-d, but it means "the Laws Moses brought down from Mt. Sinai" ) is nonsense -- by all accounts they were already living together and most likely hadn't made a =formal= public deal of things. Once they were living under the same roof, and all sources I know of indicate they were, there was a strong presumption they'd been sexually involved, and that's good enough to be married.
So, not only was Mary not a "virgin", because the Hebrew just doesn't mean that, but Mary and Joseph were lawfully married under Jewish Law because Jewish Law is like that.
"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."
First of all; I do NOT believe Jesus, Mary or Joseph were REAL persons. I was commenting on the meaning of the word 'virgin' in biblical times. It did NOT refer to any sexual activity or non-activity, it ment 'young girl/woman' not yet married. The Jewish/Hebrew law about "your a real Jew if your mother is Jewish" comes about because of the frequaint invasions of Hebrew lands by non Jews, reguardless of how the invading army made out on the battle field the invaders RAPED and left behind a good number of pregnant Jewish women; some married some not. The law makers decided these children would be Jewish, if the rape victom was already married the child was considered the husbands child no matter what the reality was.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Yes, that is true of most people generally.
However,
http://interlinearbible.org/exodus/2-11.htm
"Now it came about in those days, when Moses had grown up, that he went out to his brethren and looked on their hard labors; and he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his brethren."
is an example of a Jewish use of brethren.
As far as the Christian use of it goes, the word used in Galatians 1:19 is adelphos.
"and other of the apostles I did not see, except James, the brother of the Lord."
http://bible.cc/galatians/1-19.htm
http://concordances.org/greek/80.htm discusses this and is inconclusive.
A reasonable sounding summary of the case against blood brother is here:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13667930&postcount=11
Paul is well known to be the earliest Christian author. In the earliest copies we have of Paul's writings, he frequently uses the Greek word "adelphos", just as he's done in this case. The question is whether Paul's use of the word "adelphos" here is a reference to a biological sibling.
Paul used the term "adelphos" every time he referred to any member of any Christian group! So, while Paul in Galatians refers to James as the Lord's "adelphos", only in English translation can Paul's personal usage of this 1'st century Greek term be conflated with a biological sibling, and only then if one is also lazy and fails to employ critical thinking.
One of Paul's many goals (certainly at least in the ahistoricist view) was to synthesize the various Jesus stories that arose from Q, conflations of fables and parables and sayings of Cynic and Stoic philosophers and sages and other itinerant preachers and teachers, Jewish Wisdom literature, the accretion of myth and stories retrospectively force-fit onto the name Yeshua/Jesus, and the so-called "Mystery Cults" (the Gnostics and so on) of the day, who had long already adopted the term "adelphos" to refer to initiates of those gnostic and other mystery cults. Paul, who was a scholar possessed of enormous philosophical and theological knowledge, brought that meaning of the word into his writings as well as the mere courteous title "adelphos".
In 1 Corinthians 1:1, Sosthenes is called adelphos, and in Colossians 1:1, so is Timothy. And in Corinthians 15:6, 500 adelphos receive a spiritual vision of the risen Christ. Are they biological siblings of Jesus?
Thanks to tonyjeffers via Buddy for the bible resource.
I'm familiar with the material.
I'm trying to get ready for my day job (heh), but there are other passages where Jesus's biological siblings are mentioned. This has created controversy within the Catholic Church due to the doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary.
One thing about Paul is that he wasn't part of the Jerusalem "in crowd". Most of Paul's efforts are aimed at un-Jewish-ifying whatever it was that Jesus (or John the Baptist, James and Peter, all of whom are historical) was up to. Paul's primary means of doing so was turning Jesus into a divinity and abolishing Jewish law, but that's besides the point. Paul wasn't just a fringer, he was excommunicated.
"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."
Yes, Matthew 13:55 for example has James, Joses, Simon and Judas as his brothers. The gospels are very late though and much less likely to be reliable.
I concentrated on Paul because his are the earliest writings we have and his claim to actually having met the brother of Jesus is one of the stronger cases for the historicity of a Jesus the Christ. It is strange though that Paul didn't make more of this. If he had actually met a real biological brother of his god, one would expect some snippets of biographical information, even though Paul and James were from different factions.
You mean just like how Helen of Troy is the daughter of Zeus? Come on dude! There is no historical record of ANY of those fake bible characters!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
So you don't believe Jesus existed but those other 3 did? I assume they lived many decades after the mythical Jesus and you have sources OUTSIDE the bible to corroborate that? And I don't mean nonsense like the Dead Sea Scrolls or other bible mythology!
You can find corroborating documents from other religions (like Buddhism and Hinduism) to support their gods too!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
I'm just saying what the NT says re Matthew 13:55, I'm not saying I believe it.
Somebody wrote the Pauline epistles, so I'll call him Paul, though they weren't all written by the same person.
I'm still unsure re James (and which James is which) and Peter, though I seem to remember that John the Baptist is attested to.
More reading required.
I believe this is what you are referring to:
Epistles of Paul: Paul's biblical letters (epistles) serve as the oldest surviving Christian texts, written probably around 60 C.E. Most scholars have little reason to doubt that Paul wrote some of them himself. Of the thirteen epistles, bible scholars think he wrote only eight of them, and even here, there occurs interpolations. Not a single instance in any of Paul's writings claims that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, nor does Paul give any reference to Jesus' life on earth (except for a few well known interpolations). Therefore, all accounts about a Jesus could only have come from other believers or his imagination. Hearsay.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
I agree re Paul and Jesus, but Paul does claim to have physically met a James.
'Is This Not the Carpenter' is an anthology that examines the historicity of Christ.
One of the editors is Thomas S Verenna, who used to post here. I don't know why he left, but he's not been around for a while.
It is unlikely that many here will be buying this book as it is so expensive, so the reviews will have to suffice.
See http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1739 for Carrier's review.
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/richard-carrier-reviews-is-this-not-the-carpenter/ for Verenna's awareness of Carrier's review.
Opie,
Please address and refute the talmudic and liberal Jesus Seminar references. The burden of proof is on you since I negate your proposition. Also, please deal with the intertestament books, along with P52, p46 and of course, MSS 010 and 012.
Unless you speak within reason, you're a puppet with no brain, just lips to move with the sound of hot air among the naive, among the stupid, and among the damned. Wiki can't help you this time lol.
Respectfully,
Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).
A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.
Respectfully,
Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).
I don't know if anyone cares much about this issue, but I'll post it anyway.
It illustrates just how difficult it is for new ideas to be accepted in academic religious studies.
This is a memoire by biblical scholar Thomas L Thompson, relating the difficulties he faced in his career as a result of not following the party line.
http://bibleinterp.com/opeds/critscho358014.shtml
extract:
As Hans Küng, with whom I had studied Systematic theology, was on leave for a research semester, I was assigned to take my examinations in dogmatic theology from the professor of systematic theology, Joseph Ratzinger.
When I spoke with him concerning bibliography for the upcoming examination, he explained to me that a Catholic could not write such a dissertation as I had and that I would not be receiving my PhD from their faculty in Tübingen. I must point out that the shock with which I met this statement, at the time, caused me to fixate my thoughts on the first phrase: that a Catholic could not write it ... but I had! ... and what then was I, if not a Catholic? ... and then: why couldn’t a Catholic write it? In that short time, I sensed the coming alienation from friends and colleagues in the Catholic faculty with whom I had worked and shared my life with for nearly ten years. I was closed out of Narnia as I moved into what was to be a long period of conflict and disagreement, culminating in the rejection of my PhD candidacy and my finally leaving Tübingen in 1975.
gateway timeout
GLADLY! "The bible says so" is NOT evidence of Jesus! You realize how many stories exist all over the world of gods? The bible is just another story with ZERO corroboration outside bible mythology that Jesus or the characters within EVER existed!
Based on your logic I guess you think Hercules was real too!
To take one example, examine the evidence for Hercules of Greek mythology and you will find it parallels the "historicity" of Jesus to such an amazing degree that for Christian apologists to deny Hercules as a historical person belies and contradicts the very same methodology used for a historical Jesus.
Note that Herculean myth resembles Jesus in many areas. The mortal and chaste Alcmene, the mother of Hercules, gave birth to him from a union with God (Zeus). Similar to Herod who wanted to kill Jesus, Hera wanted to kill Hercules. Like Jesus, Hercules traveled the earth as a mortal helping mankind and performed miraculous deeds. Similar to Jesus who died and rose to heaven, Hercules died, rose to Mt. Olympus and became a god. Hercules gives example of perhaps the most popular hero in Ancient Greece and Rome. They believed that he actually lived, told stories about him, worshiped him, and dedicated temples to him.
Likewise the "evidence" of Hercules closely parallels that of Jesus. We have historical people like Hesiod and Plato who mention Hercules in their writings. Similar to the way the gospels tell a narrative story of Jesus, so do we have the epic stories of Homer who depict the life of Hercules. Aesop tells stories and quotes the words of Hercules. Just as we have a brief mention of Jesus by Joesphus in his Antiquities, Joesphus also mentions Hercules (more times than Jesus), in the very same work (see: 1.15; 8.5.3; 10.11.1). Just as Tacitus mentions a Christus, so does he also mention Hercules many times in his Annals. And most importantly, just as we have no artifacts, writings or eyewitnesses about Hercules, we also have nothing about Jesus. All information about Hercules and Jesus comes from stories, beliefs, and hearsay. Should we then believe in a historical Hercules, simply because ancient historians mention him and that we have stories and beliefs about him? Of course not, and the same must apply to Jesus if we wish to hold any consistency to historicity.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
The Talmudic references are interesting, but the problem of course is that the Babylonian Talmud was written between the 3rd and 7th centuries CE. The Palestinian Talmud was earlier, though still late, but has no references to a Jesus Christ. A case can be made that the supposed JC references can be textually dated back to 200 CE or so, but that is still too late.
There are further arguments against the Babylonian Talmud references, but due to the late dating, there is no need to go into them.
As regards the Jesus Seminar references and the intertestament books, that is a bit vague. Can you be more specific?
As for P52, p46, MSS 010 and 012, I don't know what they are. Shameful, but true.
Tom changed his position on a few things and distanced himself from the RRS. The extent of which I do not know, and the reason for which I do not know. I don't think he'll be back. But you never know.
@Jean
The burden of proof is on you, the claimant, when there is no evidence to support your lies.
Of course, we all know you don't know how logic works.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
The Jesus seminar and Christian apologists only quote Christian mythology to support other Christian mythology! That is not evidence by any stretch of the imagination!
The same way you can quote different Buddhist texts to support Buddha and different Hindu texts to support Krishna or one of the many Hindu gods.
ChristNUTS lose again!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
This Nativity video by 43alley was instrumental for me in understanding the fictionality of Jesus. Another good resource to add to my anti-biblical videos. You'll see how the Evangelists stole the Moses and Samson stories and applied them to Jesus, so that he fullfills every single prophecy ever heard of, plus standard god CV part, the virgin birth.
Another video on Jesus will be great for Christians who think they know the history of Bible. Actually, they think Bible is the history of Bible. Hell, that's what I thought for a large part of my life. Or have thought, if I cared, which I didn't.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
But it says you are a Theist so you are obviously not a ChristNUT then what are you?
Are you into one of the eastern religions or one of the native European religions like Asatru?
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
Who the hell is James??
LMAO! As you can tell I am not into bible mythology! What proof or sources do you have outside the bible that corroborate this bozo James ever actually existed?
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
allow me to state again my personal view, along with many scholars who have no known religious agenda, that there is a kernel of historical fact inside almost every myth. i believe there was a historical jesus. i also believe there was a historical krishna, odin, indra, achilles, and, yes, hercules. these were probably charismatic figures who left a huge impression, either religiously or martially, and were deified after the fact, just as romulus and remus, castor and pollux, alexander and many of the caesars were deified after the fact. that the details of their mythologies are so similar just shows how much their sects influenced each other. it also shows humanity's predisposition toward certain archetypes.
i hold this view for two reasons. one, i think the mythological texts are evidence of a sort. our modern conception of historiography didn't really start coming together until the 18th century, so it's unfair to dismiss ancient texts entirely because they don't conform to those standards. two, it just goes against everything i know of human nature that so many intricate bodies of myths were just made up by one or two devious men out of thin air.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
My information is, that all these great religious figures basically try to portray a story. A story with a sequence of symbolical scenes that refer to stages of personal evolution of consciousness, how a man (who is already a half-god by birth, they never forget to emphasize) may become fully divine.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
James is supposed to be the head of the Jerusalem church faction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just
I haven't had time to look further into it, but I consider the epistles in the bible to be less likely to be storytelling than the gospels.
A problem is that since they often only use people's first names, it is often hard to tell which James is which.
I've ruled out Jeffrick so far though.
Thanks x.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Is that the James who's the alleged brother of Jesus or a different James? LOL....check this out:
The Burial Box of James
Even many credible theologians bought this fraud, hook-line-and-sinker. The Nov./Dec. 2002, issue of Biblical Archaeology Review magazine announced a "world exclusive!" article about evidence of Jesus written in stone, claiming that they found the actual ossuary of "James, Brother of Jesus" in Jerusalem. This story exploded on the news and appeared widely on television and newspapers around the world.
Interestingly, they announced the find as the "earliest historical reference of Jesus yet found." Since they claimed the inscribing on the box occurred around 70 C.E., that agrees with everything claimed by this thesis (that no contemporary evidence exists for Jesus). Even if the box script proved authentic, it would not provide evidence for Jesus simply because no one knew who wrote the script or why. It would only show the first indirect mention of a Jesus and it could not serve as contemporary evidence simply because it didn't come into existence until long after the alleged death of Jesus.
The claim for authenticity of the burial box of James, however, proved particularly embarrassing for the Biblical Archaeology Review and for those who believed them without question. Just a few months later, archaeologists determined the inscription as a forgery (and an obvious one at that) and they found the perpetrator and had him arrested (see 'Jesus box' exposed as fake and A fake? James Ossuary dealer arrested, suspected of forgery).
Regrettably, the news about the fraud never matched the euphoria of the numerous stories of the find and many people today still believe the story as true.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
Yes, they are supposed to be the same. Josephus in Antiquities refers to a James, but those passages are spattered with interpolations and it's hard to get to the bottom of them.
Ah yes, the old James Ossuary hoax.
Any reference by Josephus to James or Jesus was debunked has a hoax a century or more ago. The man who pulled off the James ossuary hoax is now doing time in an Israeli prison for the hoax.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
I'd read about and have been persuaded by the argument that the Jesus references and most of the James ones were Christian insertions/interpolations/forgeries/hoaxes, but wasn't aware that all the James ones were debunked too. Cheers, I'll take that into serious consideration.
Wow, I didn't know that. In that case I'm surprised more people aren't put in jail for that! Have you guys heard of the book "Unholy Business"?
I once heard the author do an interview on the radio and she said there are over 100,000 fake artifacts on Christianity in that "holy land" part of the world! Her famous quote from the interview was "There is no proof of the material existence of Jesus".
Considering how much crap has been FAKED and all the lies and interpolations I'm amazed the Jesus myth isn't more mainstream! Although historians Price, Carrier, and Doherty are carrying the flag for the Jesus myth! Carrier said eventually half of all historians will realize Jesus IS a myth!
You would think people would realize something is really WRONG when Jesus promised to return during the lifetime of his disciples yet he's over 2,000 years late!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
Hadn't heard of Unholy Business, but a search showed that it sounds interesting.
I've just got a copy of Carrier's Proving History, so that'll keep me busy for a bit.
Those are good and the links I have in my signature are good too! Spread the word buddy! The TRUTH is Jesus is no different than Zeus or Medusa!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
The unlearn thread pointed me to William Hamby which led to another (brief) review of this book.
http://www.examiner.com/review/is-this-not-the-carpenter-examines-the-historical-jesus